I am no expert and what I write is my opinion... But I have a possible theory for the silence......
What did they originally charge Dr Vincent Tabak with??
With all of the outrage and talk of hanging Dr Vincent Tabak, this being even before he had sat at trial, being guilty before being proved guiltier....
I still cannot get that concept out of my head, the presumption of Innocence seems to have failed in this case....
When they arrested Dr Vincent Tabak in January 2011 and subsequently charged him, what did they charge him with??
Murder?.. we don't really know, which is odd in itself... we have again presumed that must have been the case....
Did the Prosecution miss a trick?? They shouldn't have..
Dr Vincent Tabak has only ever had one charge apparently brought against him... And realistically they could have brought more charges...
More charges that would have added to his already life sentence... And I am amazed that they haven't...
Why not accept the Manslaughter Plea then add on the charge of
Obstructing a Coroner -
Preventing the Burial of a Body?? Obstructing a coroner or preventing a Burial if the disposal of the body is more serious than the unlawful act which caused the death.
And as we do not know really what happened to Joanna Yeates (imo) and they don't know what happened to Joanna Yeates, that charge would have been the icing on the cake... Dr Vincent Tabak could have said it was an accident in a sexual context.. He could have said it was an accident full stop.. It was seconds according to the trial, not what you would expect to cause someones death, so quickly..(imo)
Joanna Yeates was removed from her home apparently... Concealed.. hidden ...
Twice Clegg said the jury would hear no excuses from him about Tabak's "disgusting" behaviour after he killed Yeates. The decision to hide the body – which remained concealed for eight days – had caused untold anguish and agony for her family. Tabak, he said, had shown himself to be very calculating.
Clegg (imo) should never had Dr Vincent Tabak on the stand... they obviously never knew what had happened to Joanna Yeates....
Obstructing a Coroner - Preventing the Burial of a Body
Any disposal of a corpse with intent to obstruct or prevent a coroner's inquest, when there is a duty to hold one, is an offence. The offence is a common law offence, triable only on indictment and carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and/or a fine.
The offence of preventing the burial of a body (indictable only, unlimited imprisonment) is an alternative charge. Proof of this offence does not require proof of the specific intent required for obstructing a coroner.
The offences of obstructing a coroner and preventing the burial of a body may arise for example, when a person decides to conceal the innocent and unexpected death of a relative or friend or prevent his burial. Such cases inevitably raise sensitive public interest factors which must be carefully considered.
When the evidence supports a charge of involuntary manslaughter, it may be necessary to add a charge of obstructing a coroner or preventing a burial if the disposal of the body is more serious than the unlawful act which caused the death.
Obstructing a coroner may also amount to an offence of perverting the course of justice. Regard must be had to the factors outlined in General Charging Practice, above in this guidance and Charging Practice for Public Justice Offences, above in this guidance, which help to identify conduct too serious to charge as obstructing a coroner, when consideration should be given to a charge of perverting the course of justice.
So we have a far more serious Charge available to The CPS... yet they fail to charge Dr Vincent Tabak with this extremely serious offence... But what they did manage to do, was get Dr Vincent Tabak to admit to moving Joanna Yeates body from her Flat at 44, Canygne Road to Longwood Lane when he was at trial in October 2011.....
That in itself is an admission of
Obstructing a Coroner -Preventing the Burial of a Body??.. So what charges were possible to bring against Dr Vincent Tabak to make sure he spent endless extra Years in Jail..
* Obstructing a Coroner -Preventing the Burial of a Body
* Murder
* Perverting the course of Justice...
Perverting the Course of JusticePerverting the course of justice is a serious offence. It can only be tried on indictment and carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Plenty there to secure his fate bringing multiple life sentences.... And it brings many questions... Either they know that Joanna Yeates was 'on Longwood lane ' from when she went Missing, and not where they say she was therefore her body hadn't been moved...
Or alternatively, they have the option to still charge him with the "Obstructing a Coroner" and Preventing the Burial of a Body ... which carries a hefty sentence..
And maybe that is the possible reason that Dr Vincent Tabak has kept quiet.... Even if his sentence was reduced to "Manslaughter" would he risk being charge with the "Obstructing a Coroner on top, of a Manslaughter Sentence?? Still leaving him in prison for many many years.. Or even a life sentence for 'Perverting The Course of Justice'..
We know that when the child porn charges came they kept counts on file..
Two other counts of making indecent photographs, relating to 23 images found on external hard drives, were ordered to lie on file.
If The Obstruction of the Coroner isn't the reason that Dr Vincent Tabak has kept quiet... Is it the fact they could choose to charge him with "Perverting The Course of Justice'?? And these are the reasons why Dr Vincent Tabak has kept his head down and not made any noises about Innocence??
Perverting The Course of Justice was admitted by Dr Vincent Tabak in his story on the stand... They had no idea what happened to Joanna Yeates until Dr Vincent Tabak took the stand and told that ridiculous story in October 2011... If they knew what had happened to Joanna Yeates when the trial started.. Dr Vincent Tabak would have had more charges laid against him and could have had more charges laid against him....(imo).. But those charges do not happen when the trial commences... But unbeknown to Dr Vincent Tabak, by taking the stand and making the admissions he did, he therefore has opened up a charge of Perverting The Course of Justice.... Not once but twice... (CJ)
Dr Vincent Tabak gains nothing by taking the stand and telling the world he killed Joanna Yeates... No reduction on sentence ... absolutely nothing... If he had kept quiet and said nothing, it would have been up to the prosecution to prove that Dr Vincent Tabak had "Murdered Joanna Yeates... They already had rejected The manslaughter Plea..
So Dr Vincent Tabak could have just sat there quiet and Clegg should have advised him of that (imo).. And I do not understand why Clegg did not advise his client of that... Especially as he admits to "Perverting The Course of Justice by admitting to moving Joanna Yeates body...And implicating CJ..
So yes I can see Dr Vincent Tabak and his family and anyone else keeping quiet about what really happened to Joanna Yeates... Maybe thats why CJ never mentions what he knows, maybe he is protecting Dr Vincent Tabak too...
It's a lot to risk.. Everyone believes he is guilty.. I am not one of those... But when the system has shown itself to be unfair to a defendant, why would he risk being imprisoned for any longer... Therefore his family wouldn't want to say anything either... They wouldn't want to make it any worse for him...
I believe even if they let Dr Vincent Tabak go free tomorrow, he would not say anything in fear of having other charges brought against him... So on saying that, no-one will ever find out the truth in this case... And the Yeates family will never get real justice (imo).. The real killer walks away scott free and the Placid Dutchman knows not to speak out...(imo)
Is it possible that they could still charge Dr Vincent Tabak with either "The offence of preventing the burial of a body' or Perverting the course of Justice.... ( For my theory to add weight to why Dr Vincent Tabak is silent)
All the prosecution needs to prove is that there is a possibility that what the complainant has done "without more" might lead to a wrongful consequence, such as the arrest of an innocent person
As we know CJ was arrested,but the Police have made us believe that the phone call from Holland was important in the detention of CJ... the Attorney General even stated in July 2011 that CJ was a wholly Innocent man... which brings me back to why they didn't bring the charge of 'Perverting The course of Justice' against Dr Vincent Tabak in the first place... They Insisted that he tried to implicate the landlord... On The Law Pages it says that he tried to implicate the landlord and that the landlord was arrested ..... The Attorney General says CJ is wholly Innocent when the Newspapers are brought to court in July 2011....
I think Dr Vincent Tabak and everyone else is stuck between a rock and a hard place.....
Why didn't they charge Dr Vincent Tabak with "The offence of preventing the burial of a body (indictable only, unlimited imprisonment) as an alternative charge. "??He's never coming out of prison on that charge... If they choose the unlimited prison option... But they don't charge him with that... Involuntary Manslaughter would support the ability to add this extra charge..
Yet for the public's satisfaction they give him life in prison instead and use unsubstanciated evidence that he was into strangulation porn after the trial to turn the public against him... To me they just wanted to shut him up and teach him a lesson and lead the general public into believing a true monster killed Joanna Yeates and not a Placid Dutchman... Or did they want the information out there for some other reason??
Did Dr Vincent Tabak really kill Joanna Yeates??
I don't think so...(imo)...
They really could have thrown the book at him and they didn't.... why not??
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/false-allegations-rape-andor-domestic-abuse-see-guidance-charging-perverting-coursehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-31700109https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-justice-offences-incorporating-charging-standardhttps://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/oct/19/vincent-tabak-joanna-yeates-court
